Wednesday, September 23, 2009

I would like to apologise for assuming that the line breaks in your reply imply that your response was a cut-and-paste job. I have done a test, and I can't verify that this is the case. I would also like to apologise for the confrontational tone that my first two sentences established.

The formatting of your document makes it clear that the response was cut and pasted from a text document edited using notepad.

That means that for all my questions, you have answered me with a cut-and-paste job about just the most obvious issue I raised.

This might be acceptable if I was only asking about internet filtering, but I was trying to get a more general overview of how you feel about the importance of civil liberties, especially freedom of speech, and you have answered me with a response that, quite frankly, I expected to hear.

I understand your opposition to the program based on efficacy, and I also agree with those objections, and I also disagree with Labor's removal of the program that allowed parents to voluntarily use free blocking software.

If Labor announced results which showed that the internet could be filtered with no performance penalties, I would like to know if you would vote that it should be filtered.

This email is not on Today Tonight, so I'm not looking for policy statements designed to cast doubt on the ability of the other side. I already have that doubt. I am looking for a proper, reasoned response that takes into account that we live in a free democracy, and I am looking for assurances that the people who represent me will fight to make sure that I contiinue to live in a free democracy.

I asked about the filtering scheme from the civil liberties perspective, and Petro answered it from the "Won't somebody think of the children?" perspective.

Expected, but disappointing.

Dear Mr Crafti,

Thank you for your email regarding your concerns with the FederalGovernment's plans for a mandatory internet filtering system. Iapologise for the delay in responding to you.

The Coalition fully supports guarding our children from being exposed toinappropriate internet content, and is of the firm belief thatappropriate adult supervision and guidance should be front and centre ofall online safety efforts.

Almost two years after coming to office with a plan to censor theInternet the Rudd Government has not even managed to release results forlong overdue filtering trials, let alone come close to actuallyimplementing its policy.

The trials were supposed to start last December and take a minimum sixweeks, but these were delayed by several months because of a lack ofsupport from major Internet Service Providers. Results were thenexpected sometime in July, but were then further delayed until August orSeptember.

The Coalition has said from the beginning it was prepared to assess anycredible trial results, but almost two years after coming to office theGovernment has failed to produce them, let alone put forward any formalproposal for consideration.

Previous trials of filtering technology have exposed serious problemswith both the over-blocking and under-blocking of content and concernsalso remain about the adverse impact a national filtering regime couldhave on Internet speeds.

Huge doubts also continue to surround the type of content Labor wants tofilter and how it will compile a black-list which would form the basisof its filtering regime.

The Coalition has consulted extensively in relation to internetfiltering and based on all the current evidence and advice, includingthe previous laboratory tests, we have real concerns about the efficacyof Labor's proposal.

Serious questions also have to be asked about how genuine the Governmentis when it comes to improving online safety. Last December it cancelledthe practical program established by the Coalition, which saw freecontent filters provided to Australian families for installation ontheir personal computers.

These filters were provided on an optional basis and would allow parentsto supplement their online safety arrangements with software that wouldbe tailored to each individual household's needs.

In relation to criminal conduct online, it is the Coalition's firmbelief that our nation's law enforcement bodies need to be adequatelyresourced to monitor and investigate unlawful activity.

Thank you again for taking the time to express your views, which will betaken into account should the Government put forward any finalproposition for consideration.